Yeah, anyone can claim whatever they want. Making other people respect your claim is the hard part.

Source: https://beige.party/@intransitivelie/117057396732763183

Why is everything screenshots these days :(

I really don’t care what you use but I highly recommend picking something extensible or fully featured. No need to cut yourself off of valuable tools.

(Also I use Neovim BTW)

Me neither. I heard the hype so I went, I love me a good chicken sandwich. It was fine. But I don’t think I’ve gone again. Might if I was hungry and it was nearby. But it always has a line up the door and was packed. These people must see something that I don’t in it.

Honestly AI has been used for moderation for decades. The newer models will be quite effective. It could be very useful for limiting lower effort spam. Sure dedicated spammers will figure it out and get by it but as the models get better that will get harder.

Of course like every use of probabilistic technology like AI it should still go to human review. We shouldn’t be shadowbanning people because computer said no. But holding suspicious posts in a review queue for the moderators seems quite reasonable (much like they already do with their current systems).

Honestly this sounds more like an investor update showing how innovative we are using modern technology and how it is going to really improve the platform and stonks will go up up up than any meaningful change to their current moderation systems.

In theory it is safe. When a Nix package is built it isn’t “installed”. Unless root is running/installing random packages out of the Nix store there is no problem. As long as the user’s aren’t added to the trusted-users option they shouldn’t be able to cause any problems for other users.

However like any multi-user system you are sharing a Linux kernel. A kernel is a very complex piece of software with a huge attack surface. Privileged escalation vulnerabilities are commonly found. (This also applies to the nix-daemon, but it is a bit smaller attack surface but vulnerabilities are still occasionally found.) So you shouldn’t assume strong security isolation. I would say that a setup like this is acceptable for mostly-trusted people like coworkers or friends that are not expected to actively exploit vulnerabilities but definitely wouldn’t let random unknown users use the system.

So if you want strong isolation use a VM or separate hardware, but then you won’t be able to share the builds and packages defeating the point in this case.

Every team has a QA environment. The fancy ones have a separate production environment.

In most distros shutdown is a symlink to systemctl.

I don’t get what you are angry about. If it is one email before deleting I think that’s pretty reasonable. You could have had some important-to-you conversations that you would be upset to lose.

If they keep sending stuff like this that is one thing. But I appreciate one or maybe two confirmations before someone deletes my data.

Apple is a lot better than Windows but slowly getting worse. They keep pushing their own services more and more aggressively while the quality of their software drops over time. Not to mention that iOS is so locked down that they don’t have to worry about things like pushing Edge because they just don’t allow any other browsers.

declaring multiple variables is less error-prone than in C. In C, the following declares x to be a pointer, but (surprisingly at first!) y to be a normal integer:

int* x, y;

Whereas the equivalent in Go does what you’d expect, declaring both to be pointers:

var x, y *int

I don’t think this is a related at all. C could have easily decided that the definition makes both x and y pointers. They just decided not to so that you can declare more variables on one line by being able to do int x, *y, **z, .... It is more flexible.

Similarly that Go line could have been parsed like var x, (y*) int if they wanted to. They just made a different choice.

I’ve definitely ran into the situation where I fucked something up half-way though installing a new distro, then had to wipe it to go back to an old distro so that I could access the internet and find out what I did wrong so that I could start from scratch.

I hate doing debugging on my phone, but man sometimes is it better than the alternative.

Because not everyone has or wants credit cards. Children can’t get credit cards. Code cards are also useful for gifts.

I think you are right that even less people will buy them than physical games, but I don’t think they will be irrelevant.

Trump doesn’t appear to care much about the law.

We have all evaluated the options. Most of us decided that sewing was in fact too extreme.

Please explain what you mean and how this could be abused. What does “real” mean in this context? They both have the same code. It would probably help if you can provide a specific attack that could actually cause harm rather than just stating facts that have unclear risk.

It doesn’t mutate history. It just creates a new branch of history in their own fork. Just like any new commit would do.

I don’t understand. Why does having two commit IDs with the exact same code cause problems.

A green “Verified” badge on GitHub is supposed to mean that a trusted author signed it

The author did sign it. It is the exact same code.

An attacker can reissue the same signed code under a fresh ID that’s still verified to slip past.

To split past what? At best it seems that they would be able to have a different ID for the exact same code, which seems harmless? Slightly confusing at worst.

Nix also doesn’t use PGP signatures, it requires a separate hash of the resulting commit (the files with the .git directory stripped by default).

I’m a little confused by what this is saying. It seems that you can create a basically identical commit with a different signature and thus a different (hashed) ID.

So basically you can take a Signature S1 and produce a valid Signature S2 over the same data that is not identical.

This doesn’t seem like a very useful exploit primitive to me. Not nothing, but doesn’t seem like a big deal. I feel like I am misunderstanding something.

Generally speaking it will be fine. SSH will also refuse keys with open permissions so you would notice if it was wide-open to other users of the device.

But you know if you are running random code or AI harnesses as that user it can be at risk. Or if you copy around the key all over the place it is more likely to leak. But generally speaking you are secure by default, just don’t do something dumb with the key and you’ll have no problems.